What was the most powerful battleship in a straight duel, May 1941?

What was the most powerful battleship in a straight-out duel, May 1941?

  • Total voters
    92

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


I think the 4 were:

Conte De Cavour 1911
Giulio Cesare 1911
Andrea Doria 1913
Caio Duilio 1913
 
vikingBerserker said:
But that was after having lost the Royal Oak on 10/39 and Hood on 5/41.
Click to expand...

Uh, what's your point here? The RN were at war, so it's hardly surprising that they lost ships Sept 1939 - Nov 1941.


In fact, if you want to split hairs, the Royal Navy was the ONLY Naval power that didn't lose ANY modern capital ships after Dec 1941 - even the US can't claim that. ( modern - ie built 1930's or later)
 
Ivan1GFP said:
Hi VikingBerserker,

Regarding the Russians never having lost a battleship, I thought they lost the Marat to a bombing attack?

- Ivan.
Click to expand...

Ivan,

I happened to stumble across this while reading the Nov 18th, 1941 issue of "Der Adler", its' the Marat after haven been bombed:
 

Attachments

  • Marat.JPG
    63 KB · Views: 109
vikingBerserker said:
So THAT'S the one. I'd always hear he had sank a battleship but never knew which one. THANKS!
Click to expand...

Which other battleship were you thinking of?

I think only the Marat the only Allied BB sunk by air in the ETO.

(other than the Italian "Roma" sunk by air-launched guided bomb, from German Dorniers IIRC.)
 
freebird said:
Which other battleship were you thinking of?

I think only the Marat the only Allied BB sunk by air in the ETO.

(other than the Italian "Roma" sunk by air-launched guided bomb, from German Dorniers IIRC.)
Click to expand...

I had assumed it was either one of the Greek Battleships the Luftwaffe had sunk (Kilkis and Lemnos) or another ship ID'd as a battleship such as a large cruiser or a monitor.
 
There were no British or US Battleships sunk by airpower after December 41. There were no Brit carriers sunk by airpower after 1941, though they did lose several to Uboats.

Brits lost the barham to Uboat attack, and the QE and Valiant (???) to sabotage by the Italians though they were refloated and repaired. Warspite was heavily damaged off Salerno by flying bomb, and never fully repaired properly

Kilkis and Lemnos were predreadnoughts and no longer rated as Battleships at the time they were attacked. They had in fact been demilitarised and largely disarmed.

Axis Battleships that I can think of being sunk by airpower in Europe include Tirpitz, Gneisenau (first by air laid mines, and then by bombing whilst in port), Scheer, Cavour, with many ships laid up for months due to damage
 
parsifal said:
There were no British or US Battleships sunk by airpower after December 41. There were no Brit carriers sunk by airpower after 1941, though they did lose several to Uboats
Click to expand...

I assume you are only referring to the ETO?


parsifal said:
Kilkis and Lemnos were predreadnoughts and no longer rated as Battleships at the time they were attacked. They had in fact been demilitarised and largely disarmed.
Click to expand...

Actually Lemnos was the only one disarmed and demilitarized and was being used as an accommodation ship. The Kilkis was placed into reserve in 32 and retained her guns. She was still rated as a Battleship according to Conway's. However, they both have been traditionally referred to as battleships (be it right or wrong) in the same way the USS Utah at Pearl Harbor was.
 

Attachments

  • Kilikis.jpg
    88.9 KB · Views: 89
Last edited:
 
So the general summation is the Bismark is the ship that is the best of the BBs in 1941. Is there any consensus on why she is better than the North Carolina (which was my pick)?
 
I voted for LITTORIO but perhaps I may explain why NORTH CAROLINA is not a likely candidate in 1941.

At first You will notice that NORTH CAROLINA was a brand new ship (as was BISMARCK) and suffered from problems in her skeg and initial propeller design. She was prone to very heavy vibrations near her top speed of 27 kts which reduced her operational speed to under 26 kts or her sensible FC equipment was rendered useless. This means that she is a lot slower than other ships in the comparison. A modified propeller was not installed before 1942.
The details of her protection are not particularely great (altough not poor either). Her side protection system is made from inferior grade materials (US class A face hardened armour is not much better than japanese Vickers cementated, and according to Nathan Okun substantially weaker than Krupp KCn/a, british CA or Terni CA. The 15 degrees inclined 12 in main belt offers effectively no more protection than to those offered by the british HOOD and rates among the worst side protection system of all in comparison. Her deck protection systems is one of the better ones, however. Also her exposed vitals are at best protected average taken into account that 16in barbettes US class A are not any better than 14.2in Krupp KC barbettes with regard to stopping power.
Her AAA of the early 1941 period is worser than average with regard to layout, mk44 firecontroll and performances like ceiling and effective range. Her light AA outfit consisted of four jam prone 28mm quad mounts and ten .50cal twin Browning guns and looks paltry in comparison with some european BB´s of this time. The mk44 consisted spotting glasses but in no means a device to compute lead angles necessary for an efficient AAA battery- Remember, in this timeframe we also don´t have any VT-fuzes for 5in guns, those fuzes, 40mm Bofors batteries and the Mk51computing FC turned the system from a mediocre one into a great one!
While the 5in guns are acceptable AAA guns, they are in the meantime among the worst batteries for anti surface engagements with a comparably short range, long time of flight figures, soft capped common projectiles with significantly less punch than the 6in guns carried by other ships in this role. The 5in/38 biggest asset is the high volume of fire.
There is nothing wrong on her main guns Altough she did not carried a gunlaying Radar in May 1941! All she had was FA (not installed in May1941), which was a very crude gunnery radar. The operator was required to swing the antenna back and forth manually while watching the oscilloscope, during which time he estimated the range. The radar performed satisfactorily when operating at peak performance, but this performance was difficult to maintain because of the relatively short life (about 75 hours) of the oscillator tubes. Detection range for large ships at ideal conditions was 14mls. It was not particularely exact in range and bearing discrimination and the fall of shots couldn´t be judged on display.
Also the operator had to call his ranges down into the FC-room where his information were feed into a computer by another operator. Her original radarset was more thought of as an support for the optical RF equipment.

By may 1941, NORTH CAROLINA still had a way to go until full fighting efficiency was achieved by all those minor and major modifications to take effect.
 
Thanks for the post Delc. It was what I was looking for. Gives the Bismark, by virtue of her track record against the POW and Hood, the benefit in this situation. Bismark's gunnery was very impressive in the Battle of the Denmark Straights while the Hood's was pretty poor.

Ok, I get it now with regards to the Bismark.
 
So neither North Carolina and Richelieu were ready for a may '41 duel... (so around 25% of people voted for invalid one)
There are some reason why the King George V isn't challenge? (i'm sorry if already repy to this question)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

What is a Quonset Hut?
Replies
14
Views
716
HP52
H
W
What effect would a cross channel tunnel have on WW2?
Replies
17
Views
794
Airframes
O
British Balloon Bombs in the Balkans, Summer 1943?
Replies
2
Views
302
Old MacDonald
O
WWII remnants in Tunisia and Algeria
Replies
0
Views
512
Ghosts of War
A
Interwar examples where a heavy presence might have made a difference?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
Menu
Log in
Register